GNU bug report logs - #61413
[PATCH] Make warnings show a "warning" emoji instead of a stop-sign

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Kévin Le Gouguec <kevin.legouguec <at> gmail.com>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: rudolf <at> adamkovic.org, rms <at> gnu.org, maurooaranda <at> gmail.com, stefankangas <at> gmail.com, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 61413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#61413: [PATCH] Make warnings show a "warning" emoji instead of a stop-sign
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 22:24:23 +0100

Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru> writes:

>> > > <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=61413#108>
>> > > 
>> > > Screenshot:
>> > > 
>> > > <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?att=2;bug=61413;filename=Screenshot_20250223_163540.png;msg=108>
>> > 
>> > Looks nice! FTR, I'm looking at screenshot, and I think maybe it's
>> > worth clarifying what I mean while saying making the icon a button. I
>> > meant the visual appearance of a button, like the ones you can see in
>> > customization menu for variables. Let me put it another way: if you
>> > take your screenshot to a user who knows nothing about this buffer and
>> > ask them "find all buttons on the screenshot" — do you think they'd
>> > point at the warning sign and say "…and these are obviously buttons
>> > too"? I bet they would not.
>> 
>> I should have clarified: this patch does *three* things:
>> 
>> 1. it adds the "(suppress)" text button,
>> 2. it swaps the no-entry sign with a warning sign,
>> 3. (!) it un-buttonizes the warning sign.
>> 
>> IOW with that patch, the warning signs _are_ purely decorative; the
>> text
>> buttons really _are_ the only actionable buttons in that screenshot.
>> 
>> ISTM if we go for both 1 & 2 (which both had support among participants,
>> AFAIR), then 3 is a logical next step: why overload the warning sign
>> with a suppression function, when there is a perfectly explicit text
>> button for that?
>
> Oh, I see. Well, good idea, but why does (suppress) text on your
> screenshot looks like a link and not a button then?

The patch uses the 'buttonize' function, which applies the 'button'
face; which indeed by default looks like a link:

  (defface button '((t :inherit link))
    "Default face used for buttons."
    :group 'basic-faces)

So even though it looks like a link, "(suppress)" should look consistent
with other "clickable things" in Emacs.

As you noticed though, the Custom menus use a different face for their
"clickable things" - 'custom-button', which looks less like a link and
more like regular "boxed gray-background push-buttons".

ISTM using the "regular" 'button' face is better for consistency, unless
we have strong reasons to deviate; I'd rather let users & themes opt in
to aligning 'button' with 'custom-button' if they want (I do that FWIW)
instead of shunning the "canonical" button face because it doesn't look
"buttony enough" by default.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.